TEXAS BEEF GROUP v. WINFREY

No. 98-10391.

201 F.3d 680 (2000)

TEXAS BEEF GROUP; et al., Plaintiffs, Cactus Growers Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Oprah WINFREY; Harpo Productions Incorporated; Howard Lyman; King World Productions, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees. Paul F. Engler; Cactus Feeders, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Oprah Winfrey, et al., Defendants, Oprah Winfrey; Harpo Productions Incorporated; Howard Lyman; King World Productions, Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

February 9, 2000.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joseph F. Coyne, Jr. (argued), G. Scott Giesler, Michael J. St. Denis, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Los Angeles, CA, Kevin A. Isern, Law Office of Kevin A. Isern, Amarillo, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Charles L. Babcock (argued), Jack Pew, Jr., David T. Moran, Jackson & Walker, Dallas, TX, Nancy Wells Hamilton, Jackson & Walker, Houston, TX, for Oprah Winfrey, Harpo Productions Inc. and King World Productions, Inc.

Philip Craig Olsson, Washington, DC, for American Feed Industry Ass'n, National Cattlemen's Beef Ass'n, Texas Cattle Feeders Ass'n, Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Ass'n and National Livestock Producers Ass'n, Amicus Curiae.

Barry Don Peterson (argued), Peterson, Farris, Doores & Jones, Amarillo, TX, for Lyman.

Bruce W. Sanford, Baker & Hostetler, Washington, DC, for Society of Professional Journalists, Amicus Curiae.

Bruce A. Silverglade, Washington, DC, for Center for Science in the Public Interest, Amicus Curiae.

R. Bruce Rich, Jonathan Bloom, Weil, Gotshal & Manges, New York City, for Association of American Publishers, Inc. and American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, Amicus Curiae.

Roger Allen Kindler, Rebecca Brennan Branzell, Office of the General Counsel, The Humane Society of the U.S., Washington, DC, for Humane Society of the United States, Amicus Curiae.

Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.


PER CURIAM:

At issue in this case is whether The Oprah Winfrey Show and one of its guests knowingly and falsely depicted American beef as unsafe in the wake of the British panic over "Mad Cow Disease." The district court doubted that fed cattle are protected by Texas's equivalent of a "Veggie Libel Law," See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. § 96.001 et seq. The court alternately held that no knowingly...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases